A finer-grained approach to assessing the “quality” (“quantity” and “richness”) of risk management disclosures

Author:

Jia Jing,Munro Lois,Buckby Sherrena

Abstract

Purpose This paper aims to examine the “quality” of narrative risk management disclosures (RMD) from a “quantity” and “richness” (width and depth) perspective, utilising a finer-grained approach. Evidence is then provided on the relationships between RMD quality and the corporate determinants driving that quality. Design/methodology/approach Within a multidimensional quality disclosure framework, annual report narrative RMD from the top 100 Australian Securities Exchange (ASX) listed companies precisely “matched” for the 2010 and 2012 years were examined using semantic content analysis. The relationship between the dimensions and sub-dimensions of RMD “quantity” and “richness”, and various corporate characteristics were explored using ordinary least squares (OLS) regression analysis. Findings The results indicate that RMD are considerably lacking in quality, from the “quantity”, “width” and particularly the “depth” dimension and sub-dimensions for both years. Many companies provide “boiler plate” RMD over consecutive years and many do not comply with the intent of the ASX Corporate Governance Principles and Recommendations under the “if not, why not” regime (ASX CGC, 2010). Company size and cross-listing were found to be the primary determinants of higher quality RMD and, to a lesser extent, firm risk. Some evidence was found that “quality” RMD were less likely where companies are more highly leveraged and when their shareholders are more concentrated. Research limitations/implications Although two coders independently coded the RMD and specific decision rules were followed, the subjectivity inherent in conducting semantic content analysis into the dimensions and sub-dimensions of the framework cannot be completely eliminated. However, by adopting a finer-grained approach, this study contributes to the global literature on the quality of RMD. Previous studies are extended by analysing and testing the individual dimensions and sub-dimensions of “quantity” and “richness” which provides new empirical evidence and a more comprehensive portrayal of RMD quality and a greater understanding why some companies are more likely to disclose higher quality RMD than others. Practical implications These results provide useful and predominantly new empirical evidence on the quality of RMD for practitioners, regulators and researchers. As many companies are not complying with the “intent” of the “if not, why not” approach, these results support the argument for mandated narrative RMD regulations at an international level. Originality/value The multidimensional framework of RMD “quantity” and “richness” provides a basis for examining not only how much is disclosed, but what is disclosed and how. In adopting a finer-grained approach, this study analyses and tests the individual dimensions and sub-dimensions of the framework. This provides a deeper understanding of the overall quality of RMD and the determinants driving RMD quality for the sample companies.

Publisher

Emerald

Subject

Accounting,General Economics, Econometrics and Finance,General Business, Management and Accounting

Reference100 articles.

1. Analysing the determinants of narrative risk information in UK FTSE 100 annual report;The British Accounting Review,2007

2. Improving the relevance of risk factor disclosure in corporate annual reports;The British Accounting Review,2014

3. Corporate environmental disclosure, financial markets and the media: an international perspective;Ecological Economics,2008

4. Ahn, T.S. and Lee, J. (2004), “Determinants of voluntary disclosures in management discussion and analysis (MD&A): Korean evidence”, paper presented at the 16th Asian Pacific Conference on International Accounting Issues, Seoul, pp. 7-10.

5. The association between disclosure of forward-looking information and corporate governance mechanisms, evidence from the UK before the financial crisis period;Managerial Auditing Journal,2014

Cited by 26 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3